Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
mary toutonghi? the only interview i've seen from her she estimates that she babysat obama in january and february of '62. do you have a link with her stating differently?
My my, what a great memory you have, do you remember the link too?
actually obama's is consistent with the number sequence of the other birth certificates from that time ( done in bulk organized by last name ). in fact jerome corsi/WND got caught trying to cover-up this fact in their own evidence:
John Woodman is looking to sell his own book. He is more interested in debunking the messenger, than finding the truth.
wether that is true or not doesn't change that you can see the date and the registration number bleeding thru the back. they clearly contradict corsi's assertion that the registration numbers were issued chronologically ( which is probably why corsi felt the need to redact them on the front ).
so you believe the POTUS is the love canuck of malcolm x?
Could be.
Tell me this, how come Hawaii continues to refuse to allow experts to examine the original, when it supposedly has been posted for all to see? Privacy is null and void if the individual make them public (puts on internet). Why hide the original now?
How come Obama's bc says a "true and abstract copy" when it's supposed to say a "true and accurate" copy?
Could be.
Tell me this, how come Hawaii continues to refuse to allow experts to examine the original, when it supposedly has been posted for all to see?
A): the birthers have yet to put forward a single qualified forensics expert.
B): even "posted for all to see" it would still be a violation for the hawaiian DoH to release without a court order.
Quote:
Privacy is null and void if the individual make them public (puts on internet).
please cite the law that states this.
Quote:
How come Obama's bc says a "true and abstract copy" when it's supposed to say a "true and accurate" copy?
How come Obama's bc says a "true and abstract copy" when it's supposed to say a "true and accurate" copy?
the nordykes' COLB released in 1964 reads "this certifies that the above is a true and correct copy of.....". obama's 2007 COLB and the 2011 LFBC reads "i certify that this is a true copy or abstract of...." which is EXACTLY the same as the "redacted" COLB WND posted from 1995.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
